Why Use the New King James Version? 

AMEN! May God bless you as you continue to share God's Word and thanks for your encouragement!

Please consider this. Isaiah 19:14 states " The LORD hath mingled a perverse spirit in the midst of Egypt, causing her to err in EVERY WORK THEREOF..." Is there a scripture that states that God removed the perverse spirit from out of Egypt? There is not. The Septuigent is based on Alexandrian / Egyptian manuscripts. Out of Egypt. The NKJV PREFACE, specifically states that it uses Alexandrian Manuscripts Isaiah 30:1-4 Woe to the rebellious children, saith the LORD, that take counsel, but not of me; and that cover with a covering, but not of my spirit, that they may add sin to sin: 2 That walk to go down into Egypt, and have not asked at my mouth; to strengthen themselves in the strength of Pharaoh, and to trust in the shadow of Egypt! 3 Therefore shall the strength of Pharaoh be your shame, and the trust in the shadow of Egypt your confusion. Isaiah 30 is stating ,"They cover with a covering ,(i.e a shadow), but NOT OF MY SPIRIT. This is indicating that the works which come out of Egypt, mainly their covering, is not of Gods spirit, but of another. Remember Jesus had said " The words that I speak to you , they are spirit and they are life"? The Septuigent, is based on Egyptian / Alexandrian manuscripts. That is a fact. All modern translations other than the King James, or Authorized Version, have Alexandrian manuscripts. That is a fact. The scripture is clearly telling us that those who trust in them, will be in confusion. Daniel 9 also states that confusion of faces belong to those who have departed from the precepts and judgements of the LORD. Cursed be the man that trusteth in man and maketh flesh his arm and whos heart departeth from the LORD. Jer 17 Does that make any sense to you, or no? If your love is for the NKJV bible, then so be it. This message is for you. Whether you will hear or whether you will forbear, is up to you of course. I can only share truth with you. The above scriptures are a witness. Thank you for your time.

@@dansandman7271 This is nonsense. It is referring to the spirit of the world from Egypt. What are the major differences between the Old Testament between KJV and NKJV ... can you give me source ?

​@@cms123tube Its in the NKJV Preface. It states that Alexandrian/Egyptian manuscripts were used. I say, What sense would it make to trust in a bible that has Alexandrian manuscripts, given the scriptures? Seriously, read Isaiah 19:11-15 and Isaiah 30:1-5 and Isaiah 31:1-4. The LORD is talking about a spirit which comes out of Egypt. Much like how his words are " spirit, and they are life" He says , They cover with a covering , but not of my spirit. Therefore it indicates that they are covering themselves with the perverse spirit which he mingled in Egypt, causing Egypt to err in every work thereof. We wrestle not against flesh and blood. This is a spiritual war. Therefore, the prophecies of Isaiah are not given to us so that we may have an understanding of the 'Tangible" circumstances, but rather the spiritual circumstances. My understanding of the bible is that we are given instruction regarding the spiritual things of this world. The Isaiah prophecy, I believe, points to the fact that a perverse spirit was mingled in Egypt, and the LORD is warning us to not trust in any "spirit" which has come out of Egypt. The KJV does not use any Alexandrian manuscripts. Thats the main thing. As you had asked, ..Consider this. Zechariah 13:6 is supposed to be a prophecy of Jesus Christ. I find in the NKJV a prophecy of one who was a "Farmer" like unto Cain and not a Shepherd/Husbandman, Who had wounds which he received in the house of his friends which were "In between his arms" and not on his hands. Jesus had wounds on his hands ...correct? and jesus was not a farmer. Therefore, the prophet Zechariah of the NKJV is a false prophet, prophesying of one who isnt Jesus, therefore, a false Christ is present as well. Both of them spiritual and not tangible. ESV says " Im not a prophet, im a worker of the soil, FOR A MAN SOLD ME IN MY YOUTH" We can both agree that Jesus was not sold in his youth...right? So here we have a spiritual false prophet Zechariah, prophesying of a spiritual false Christ, in what can only be now labeled as a false bible. If there is one mistake, might as well be a thousand of them. And there are.

@@cms123tube Its in the NKJV Preface. It states that Alexandrian/Egyptian manuscripts were used. I say, What sense would it make to trust in a bible that has Alexandrian manuscripts, given the scriptures? Seriously, read Isaiah 19:11-15 and Isaiah 30:1-5 and Isaiah 31:1-4. The LORD is talking about a spirit which comes out of Egypt. Much like how his words are " spirit, and they are life" He says , They cover with a covering , but not of my spirit. Therefore it indicates that they are covering themselves with the perverse spirit which he mingled in Egypt, causing Egypt to err in every work thereof. We wrestle not against flesh and blood. This is a spiritual war. Therefore, the prophecies of Isaiah are not given to us so that we may have an understanding of the 'Tangible" circumstances, but rather the spiritual circumstances. My understanding of the bible is that we are given instruction regarding the spiritual things of this world. The Isaiah prophecy, I believe, points to the fact that a perverse spirit was mingled in Egypt, and the LORD is warning us to not trust in any "spirit" which has come out of Egypt. The KJV does not use any Alexandrian manuscripts. Thats the main thing. As you had asked, ..Consider this. Zechariah 13:6 is supposed to be a prophecy of Jesus Christ. I find in the NKJV a prophecy of one who was a "Farmer" like unto Cain and not a Shepherd/Husbandman, Who had wounds which he received in the house of his friends which were "In between his arms" and not on his hands. Jesus had wounds on his hands ...correct? and jesus was not a farmer. Therefore, the prophet Zechariah of the NKJV is a false prophet, prophesying of one who isnt Jesus, therefore, a false Christ is present as well. Both of them spiritual and not tangible. ESV says " Im not a prophet, im a worker of the soil, FOR A MAN SOLD ME IN MY YOUTH" We can both agree that Jesus was not sold in his youth...right? So here we have a spiritual false prophet Zechariah, prophesying of a spiritual false Christ, in what can only be now labeled as a false bible. If there is one mistake, might as well be a thousand of them. And there are.

Thanks! I am glad it was helpful

I agree. I like the KJV but the archaic language is difficult to read. That is why I like the NKJV. It basically sticks to the KJV and update the language so readers can understand. It's sad some people do not understand that. Honestly, I believe many of the KJV only crowd don't even understand the KJV accurately.

I’m glad this was helpful!

I am glad this was helpful for you. Please share it with others so they can benefit from it as well. Thanks for the kind comment

i was making a clear statement for those that say they can not understand some of the words in the kj bible it is showing how to work out the method of seeing the definition of all the more complex word meanings. the dictionary is in the bible itself

the nkjv is a corrupted version that removes and adds words to Gods preserved scriptures. the preserved word is seen today in the over 5500 manuscript copies. the nkjv version is from the gnostic alexandrian writings. Get the majority text as you will find in the kj bible which has been translated from these preserved writings.

Thanks! I am glad this was a blessing. The NKJV is a dividing line in those who are truly for the TR or not in my opinion. It shows whether you are truly concerned about the removal of scripture in the original languages or you are using the TR argument for KJV-Onlyism.

@@PastorScottIngram KJV onlyism is weird because it almost argues that the Geneva Bible and Tyndale bibles are corrupted in some way as well since they differ here and there with the KJV.

God has shown this to me so clearly lately about communication. I also believe God wants us to use the correct text too which does not remove so much as these other modern versions. This is another reason to use the NKJV as well. I appreciate your testimony and encouragement! God bless you brother!

Thanks! I appreciate the encouragement!

Thanks! I’m glad that it was a blessing!

Praise the Lord! I’m glad this has been inspirational for you and helpful!

Thanks for sharing! I too had was very disturbed by the Gideon redone New Testament. I would prefer they continued the NKJV as well. The redone ESV is a bait and switch on the unaware new believer.

I think that is a wise choice.

I am glad this was a blessing!

@lenkeydan..just a shout out for peace of mind, many kjv onlyists have become ungodly in their idolatry of the kjv.They have become crude, cruel and rude, and so much more. The nkjv is probably the best word for word translation their is.Its not perfect but still a great translation. Love and trust it..Blessings Toni's hubby

​@@tonimccoy9778 a percentage of these KJO people are the most hateful, nasty, and not Christ like. 30 years ago I visited a church revival, and as part of the service they started burning other translations of the Bible. The hair stood up on my arms and neck, and I quickly got out of that church. KJv Only cult

Praise God! I know your pain on the larger writing. I need it too!

I’m glad it was a help and a blessing

There is nothing wrong with that at all.

Thanks! I’m glad it was a blessing

Thanks but, actually, I am not saying anything any different than I said then, except maybe I have brought out more in this video on the concern considering words that people don’t instantly understand. I have always said that the KJV is more exact and the the NKJV is more instantly understandable and you should let the Holy Spirit guide you in which you decide to use. You can see that here: What is the Difference in the KJV and NKJV? ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-BXT1txdzdAc.html

They are saying the same thing. Check out this video where I discussed this years ago and I will have another discussing this same passage later this month. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-FTyPxbh_5XQ.html

NKJV says Difficult is the way which leads to life? In the NKJV that part was added, and remember what it said in Revelation about adding to his word? This is why we stay true to the KJV, using the KJV and witnessing Gods miracles using it and seeing the evidence in our church of souls being saved and powerful moves of the Holy Spirit? Enjoyed the video but no thanks

Why do you assume Jesus is talking about eternal life in this passage? Maybe he was referring to the first century tribulation that his disciples and apostles and many followers would undergo at the hands of the Judiazers.

Interesting observations. In these cases, I like to look up the Greek or Hebrew, because it helps provide clarity. especially since language changes over time. The Greek word is θλίβω thlibō, and it means to press upon, crowd up to; cause trouble; (pass.) to be narrow; to be pressed, troubled, persecuted:- persecuted, crowding, distressed, harassed, hard pressed, in trouble, narrow, trouble, troubled. So you can see that it can be translated as narrow, but it can also be translated with words such as troubled, persecution, harassment, hard pressed, in trouble, etc. - in other words, difficult. You are indeed right that Jesus said his yoke is easy and his burden is light. But the Bible also says that in the world there will be tribulation - but be of good cheer, he has overcome the world. When you think about it, while salvation is "easy," living the Christian life can at times be difficult, and in some cases, even result persecution, even in being killed. I wouldn't call that easy. :)

Yes, I agree.

Thanks! I am glad this video was a blessing and pray that helps many understand these things better.

I have read it many years myself also and I have had to learn some of the nuances of it to gather better understanding and look up some words that don't mean the same thing today. Did you watch the whole video?

@PastorScottIngram i did indeed. Twas a very informative video. Thank you. I will admit I was in the camp who believed the lies about the NKJV because of my own bias. I'm grateful that God has made my heart tender so that my own bias is not misleading me. I remember there was a steep learning curve when starting out with the KJV, and i admit sometimes i forget the meanings of some uncommon words (like abjects) and must look them up in the dictionary, but i love how literal and accurate the Kjv is to the original.

@@PastorScottIngram So, are you saying the so-called new and improved English Bibles do NOT have words that you need to "look up?" I can not think of a single book, Bible or otherwise in which I did not have to look up a word here or there.

​@@igregmartEXACTLY TRUE

Me too. I love them both and honestly feel that, because of the deletions, the other modern versions are more like storybook bibles to me. Thanks for sharing.

I’m glad this was a blessing!

Thanks for watching and sharing!

I’m glad it was a blessing and thanks for the encouragement!

We use the NKJV and also quote from the KJV regularly at Omega as well.

You are welcome. I am glad it was helpful.

So what? Didn't do it even appear to do evil. My God, stop deifying the Bible. You can't see the forest for the trees. 1 John 3:7-8: let no man deceive you: he that doeth righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous. 8 He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. Plain and simple.

@@whoavadis1984 You misunderstood my comment. I use the KJV, which is an argument against the NKJV because it changes it. Also, why would you use God's name in vain? 1 John 3:7-8: let no man deceive you: he that doeth righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous. 8 He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. Taking God's name in vain is sin.

@@swordsforthetruth what does "taking God's name in vain" mean? You don't know because you don't understand King James English lol. Yahweh commanded me to praise his name among the nations and I shall, thank you very much. The Jews, who worship Qos and Moloch and Rephan, taught you not to use the name of Yahweh Elohim. Get thee hence, accuser!

I have prepared this playlist to help with differences between the KJV and NKJV. I hope it his helpful: ru-vid.com/group/PL-dMPDGX0OTE46F9wfgCrq0zmLeAMhgIM

Thanks brother!

Thanks for your question. If you will rewatch the video in question, you will see that I wasn’t disagreeing with it, but showing the differences in the two translations. I was just pointing out that the KJV is more exact to the original languages while the NKJV seeks to be more instantly understandable. They both use the same base text as I’ve consistently stated and in this video I discuss how some of the words in the KJV are accurate yet aren’t understood instantly because they have changed definitions over time. I hope that helps you understand my position and how it hasn’t changed.

@PastorScottIngram thank you for the clarification. Have a safe and blessed New Year to you and your family brother

@PastorScottIngram one more question please. So the Kjv and Nkjv would probably be the best versions to stick with as Bibles to have correct? Thank you again for your time and feedback.

@jesselawrence6773 yes. Those two are the only two modern English translations that I trust with the KJV being more exact and the NKJV being more instantly understandable in the present day. They are both in a line of English translations going back to the 1611 KJV and that to William Tyndale’s original English translation of the Hebrew and Greek which has been passed down “to every generation.” Check out the book “In the Great Tradition” by Arthur Farstad and I believe it will be very helpful as you sort these things out.

Thank you for your time and consideration brother. Lord bless you and keep you and your family this New Year and beyond!!!

The Inspired Word of God was done in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Koine Greek. Not Spanish, German, English, nor Swahili

Wherever you heard that information, mark that person as someone who is not truthful or misinformed. I discussed these so called removals here: Does NKJV remove Lord, God, heaven, repent, blood, hell, JEHOVAH, New Testament, damnation & devils? ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-Tdc77wzUXtQ.html

Amen! I’m glad this was a blessing and a help!

Thanks! I am glad it was a blessing.

One more point I’d like to make about the NKJV is that it sort of served as a “gateway” to the KJV. I feel like doing a read through of the NKJV helped me to prepare for reading the KJV. I’m now doing a full read through of the KJV, and I honestly feel like the NKJV was very helpful as “practice”.

Let the Holy Spirit be your guide in each of these translations. They both use the same text. The only difference is one is more exact while the other is more instantly understandable.

I absolutely love the idea of doing this. I am praying about it and think it might be on the agenda in the future.

The footnote at Mark 16:9 doesn’t support the critical text but actually argues against it if you’ve read it: “[16:9] 3. Vv. 9-20 are bracketed in NU as not in the original text. They are lacking in Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus, although nearly all other mss. of Mark contain them.” The footnote at John 7:53 does likewise: “[7:53] 13. NU brackets 7:53 through 8:11 as not in the original text. They are present in over 900 mss. of John.” The NKJV, of course, doesn’t bracket any texts as not in the original as many English transactions do today. Though the NU is referenced, it is not given any bias towards it and one could argue that the NKJV is actually arguing against when reading the footnotes you referenced.

@@PastorScottIngram just what do you think "not in the original text" means? Of course it is an endorsement for the critical text. Then there is the fact that calling the critical text original is a lie. So now you have footnotes that not only call into question whether you should believe these scriptures, but also lie to you about what they are.

Please read that without the bias toward the NKJV that you’ve heard from another. The NU (critical text) puts those texts in brackets because it believes it was not in the original text. This, of course, is the position of the critical text. Then, the NKJV translators tells us simply the facts. The ending of Mark is on.y missing in two manuscripts while nearly all others contains them. The account of the adulterous woman has over 900 manuscripts that include it. They are not promoting the critical text with those words. They are simply sharing the facts which do support the traditional text

@@PastorScottIngram dear sir, do not assume that I am stupid and unable to come to my own conclusions. You do not know me, so why would you think someone else told me what to believe about the NKJV? The fact is that I bought a NKJV when it was first published. When I read it, I found it did not just remove the "thees and thous" it changed the meanings of several passages. Then I began to read the footnotes and saw the doubt they put on the scriptures. We did not have the Internet in those days. There were no blogs or vlogs. I found too many problems with the NKJV on my own. I had to repent for buying my father one too. My "bias" does not come from another person. It comes from being able to read. My mistrust of the NKJV comes from having actually read it more than once. I know there are a lot of claims made against the NKJV that are not based on truth. I am not citing any of those. I am merely stating what I have learned from reading the NKJV.

@@PastorScottIngram My bias does not come from what someone else said. It comes from the fact that in 1982, I was excited to get a Bible with updated language. Then I read it. It did more than just change the "thees and thous" . It changed words too. This changed the meaning of many verses. I began looking at the footnotes to find out why such things were done. I discovered the footnotes brought doubt to a lot of verses. I did not have the Internet in those days. You could not just look things up online. I had no idea what the Textus Receptus or Critical Text was until years later. I just knew the NKJV was wrong, because I read it. I am not someone who just believes what someone else tells me to. I check things out for myself. I knew the NKJV was wrong 40 years ago and it is still wrong today.

I trust the traditional text as the Word of God an know there are many translations today that remove many words and passages. The equivalent of 1 and 2 Peter are removed for the original languages! I am against that, but the truth is that the KJV and NKJV are using the same original languages text. This issue of "of" and "in" I have already dealt with here: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-pKL-yZy72ZM.html

That one Bible was originally written in Hebrew, Greek and some other languages. It was then translated into English and has updated over time to reflect the current way of speaking. This is just a fact.

The only change in the Bible was in the 1700's when the Latin influence was removed. Which I have also seen. A person has one Soul, why does he/she want to waste it on wannabe books instead of sharing God Love. God path is straight and narrow, without Chaos of wannabes. But satan places great Chaos on wannabes and religions, to confuse God people. Every man bible book outside of the True Word of God had to be change by law to be published, because of copy rights. Just as every religion will pinpoint one piece of God Word or their own just to say we are the one...! And that is just fact... @@PastorScottIngram

@faithhope7777 these are the updates to our English I was talking about. They aren’t major but it is good to be aware of them. What is the Difference in the KJV 1611 and 1769? ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-pIPy6hlYImQ.html

For English speaking people today, that one Bible is the King James version.

​@@igregmartAMEN

Yes, the KJV translators were talking about traditional text translations. They were unaware of 5e modern critical text translations which have removed the equivalent of 1 and 2 Peter. While I believe those critical text translations can help someone know about God, I see them more as storybook bibles than actual translations of the whole word of God. I think it is important people know this because most do not realize the massive erasing of so much of the Bible using the guise of “it is easier to read.” This is why I can really only suggest a KJV or NKJV for serious study of Gods Word. The others can only be really helpful in a children’s storybook sense.

Understanding is definitely a point of opinion and difficult to evaluate for each person. I do believe the archaic words that are very accurate in 1611, but have different meanings today can hinder understanding and why I brought those to light in this discussion.

Amen! Thanks for the encouragement! It is appreciated.

What you are showing here is that the original Hebrew and Greek words can have more than one meaning. This is the translators job to bring the best meaning into English or the language they are translating it into. I have found that the KJV 1769 is the most exact while the NKJV is the most instantly understandable and both these translations are using the traditional text passed down to every generation unlike the many who remove such large portions from the Word.

@@PastorScottIngram No, that is not correct. I'm aware that Greek words often have multiple meanings, but this is not the case with any of the words I posted. Modern Bibles still use Old English words like gospel, church, disciple and similar, which are not in the original Greek. It is never okay to change what the Greek means in English. Jesus is deliberately secular, eating, drinking and associating with sinners and the common people, while railing against the conservative religious leaders of his day. And this is the secular way the koine Greek is written, which was the language of the common people. Jesus called it his assembly, not his church and he called it the good news, not the gospel.

Many do so that’s why I a, glad we have the NKJV today.

Thanks for sharing! And watching.

The modern versions are not good. If you are a teacher you definitely should not use them

Never apologize for reading the TRUE word of God found in the King James Bible to the english speaking people.

Don’t be sorry for that! The KJV is a fine translation! Did you watch to the end of the video?

Actually it is considered officially as such

Technically it's considered early modern English. To differentiate it from middle or early English. BUT it certainly isn't the English of today.

I did one on the KJ21 and I believe I would come to similar conclusions about the KJVer. What is the Difference in the KJV and KJ21? ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-7XLwy941DBQ.html

Thanks; You can still buy the KJ21 online, but the KJVER is around here a new seller and it is not really a translation, it just puts words under the text to show better words for old words, so far I am smitten by this bible, especially the "KJVER sword study bible", awesome work and well done. although the NKJV is still my #1

The LSB is my favorite critical text Bible but it still has missing words because of its source text. NKJV is my favorite.

Does the LSB not have an equal or greater denominational slant than the ESV? Both are heavily reformed.

Thanks! I discussed a little on the LSB when I compared the NASB recently: What is the Difference in the KJV and NASB? ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-KxhrMDuR3Uw.html

Thanks for your kind words! I appreciate the encouragement!

The MEV is a good translation. I like it also.

I have read the MEV and appreciate that it uses the TR, but disliked its usage of certain words in 1 Corinthians 6:9 and other places. I discussed it when I compared it with the KJV and somewhat with the NKJV here: What is the Difference in the KJV and MEV? ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-4rPY3DLkve8.html

@@PastorScottIngram I do agree with the thought that all translations will use words that we may disagree with. Even the King James uses words it should not. For Example in Acts 12 the King James uses the word Easter. The correct word should be passover. The reason why we see Easter is due to the fact that part of King James 1 instructions to the translaters is that they were to follow establish church terminlogy. I don 't hate the King James and I use it for comparion for personal study. The most important thing is since we don't speak the original language of Koine Greek and Hebrew is we need to decide which translation are we to put our faith in even though all translations have their quiriks.,

@@PastorScottIngram One other thing. It is my understanding that the Mev is not yet considered a finished work. I myself have emailed the committee about questions how a passage is translated. I would encourage you to do the same. And BTW I don't have issue with you choosing the King James to be your teaching and preaching translation.

Hi Josiah! Love you and your family. I have studied this out pretty extensively. Did you watch the video to the end? I am in no way saying the KJV is bad. I even state it is more exact to the original languages. I have always said these things about the KJV and NKJV for my entire ministry. I just point out here that some of the words of the 1769 KJV aren't aren't easily defined today and some are confusing and the NKJV helps that for some people wanting to know God's Word even though it sacrifices the extreme exactness in English of the 1769 KJV to allow for more instant understandability. I am just concerned for those who are having a hard time studying God's Word and the barriers we are facing in evangelism.

I find that when I'm witnessing, the NKJV is more understandable.

That is one of the concerns I have had as well. Thinking of others

@@PastorScottIngram Amen! Yes!

The 1611 KJV is not the 1769 KJV either

​@@PastorScottIngram I am not aware of any substantive differences in the 1769 KJV compared to the 1611. The text of the KJV we have today is virtually unchanged from the 1611. Whereas, I have seen some far more serious differences between the KJV and NKJV. I like to refer to the NKJV as the fake KJV.

@@igregmart" He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son hath not life."-1st Jn. 5:12-1611. " He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life."-1st Jn. 5:12-1769. Maybe not a huge difference, but still a difference.

If that is true, name them and I will check the original languages and get back with you. I have not found any after extensive study. The NKJV uses the TR for its New Testament. This is just a fact.

@@PastorScottIngram Luke 1:23 "εκ σου"; Luke 6:9 "ειπεν ουν ο ιησους προς αυτους επερωτησω υμας τι εξεστιν τοις σαββασιν"; Acts 19:9 "τινος"; Romans 14:9 "και"; 2 Corinthians 4:14 NA28 "σὺν" instead of TR "δια"; Colossians 3:17 "θεω και πατρι"; 1 John 3:16 "αγαπην του θεου"; 2John 1:7 "ἐξῆλθον" instead of TR "εισηλθον"; Jude 1:3 NA28 "ἡμῶν"; Jude 1:19 "εαυτους"; Rev. 6:11 "και εδοθησαν εκαστοις στολαι λευκαι" and "αποκτεινεσθαι"

​@@PastorScottIngramHow is it that you could so easily be fooled? A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump. You have no idea what you're promoting. You make yourself a false teacher. The NKJV is not an update. It has a false gospel. Tell me "thou fool", are "we saved" (2 Corinthians 2:15 "are saved" KJV) or are we "being saved"? (2 Corinthians 2:15 NKJV "being saved")With your NKJV you're not saved but are in the process of being saved. Just a drop is all it takes, one verse. You have been deceived. How many more will you lead astray?

@fullfrontalgrace no. I am not deceived, but there is a deceiver who is leading many into falsehood and causing many to be missing the point that the real issue is that the modern translations have removed large portions of the Word in the original languages and this NKJV issue is really a dividing line that proves whether you are actually concerned about that or that you believe the falsehood that the Bible is inspired in English rather than the original languages. I have answered this one verse a long time ago here: Are You Saved or Being Saved? 1 Corinthians 1:18 (KJV/NKJV Comparison) ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-KFY-oF9L408.html

I agree. That is the Bible originally written.

@@PastorScottIngram I know

@@PastorScottIngram I only read the king James version, but I came across the Hebrew/Greek keyword, steady Bible, and figured I would get that because that’s what the origin scriptures were Hebrew and Greek

Which Greek text does it use?

@@igregmart huh?

Thanks for the question. I discussed the MEV here: What is the Difference in the KJV and MEV? ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-4rPY3DLkve8.html

There is nothing wrong with that!

I understand sanctification.

Thanks for your question. You should rewatch that video. I never say in that video that the NKJV is unacceptable. I was just pointing out that the KJV is more exact to the original languages while the NKJV seeks to be more instantly understandable. They both use the same base text as I’ve consistently stated and in this video I discuss how some of the words in the KJV are accurate yet aren’t understood instantly because they have changed definitions over time. I also state how the KJV and NKJV are using the text passed down to every generation. I hope that helps you understand my position and how it hasn’t changed.

@PastorScottIngram thank you for the answer and thank you for the great videos 😊

You say here that there are not hard lines drawn on exactness of wording and then claim there are hard lines on exactness of words when it goes along with your interpretation of things. Do you not see where this is problematic? Do you not see the irony?

@@PastorScottIngram you make a strawman. Most TR only folks also show the corruptions in the NKJV. You can go to DBS, TBS and KJBRC on the topic and you will find all expose the corruptions of the NKJV. I, like John Bunyan, believe that I have an exact copy of the originals in English in the KJB. Where SPECIFICALLY do you think all God's pure words are today? Do you actually have a final written authority that you can hold in your hands, yes or no? If Yes please tell us exactly what the final authority of your is.

I have shown you the errors of the NKJV. It is corrupt. It says to reject a divisive man in Titus 3:10. Jesus came to divide per Luke 12:51. Should we reject Jesus? I trow not. One can be a heretick and not cause division and one can cause division and not be a heretick. I had a fellow say that heretick and divisive mean the same thing. I asked him if Jesus was a heretick since he came to cause division and therefore is divisive. Do you understand the problem with the NKJV there? Matthew 7:14 is another big problem in the NKJV. The NKJV changes "narrow" to "difficult" implying a works salvation. The way to life is narrow because it is through Jesus only that we can have salvation and eternal life. The NKJV also destroys the comparison with "broad" in verse 13 and "narrow" in verse 14 by changing it to "difficult". Context is key for meaning. All a lexicon does is give a list of possible meanings for a particular word. Differing lexicons have varying lists of meanings for the same word. Context determines the correct meaning. The lexicon doesn't address the context. An example in English is the word BACK. I am coming back means I will return. My back hurts means I have pain on the dorsal aspect of my body. Back the care into the driveway means to drive the car into the driveway with the rear going first. I none of the sentences above can back mean anything else in that sentence. The same goes with words in Greek and Hebrew. The list of possible meanings contains ONE correct meaning for the reading based on the context. You really need to think on these things.

In these cases, I find it helpful to look it up on the Greek or Hebrew (depending on if it's NT or OT). Blue Letter Bible is a great free source for this. I think it will give you great clarity. A key thing to remember is that since language changes over time, there can seem to be a disagreement but all it really is is a change in how words are used over time.

You people complain about having to do extra research, yet you insist on using a translation that needs years of research to fully comprehend?

Actually… ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-7mzffNzLCo4.htmlsi=y73t_Yn8DLXwD4vg

The NKJV uses the same base text as the KJV in it's English translation.

@@PastorScottIngram No it doesnt. The KJV does not use anything from the Septuigent. The PREFACE for the NKJV clearly says they us Alexandrian Manuscripts and is based on "Critical text"

@@dansandman7271 I believe you are in a state of confusion or the copy of the NKJV you own has a misprint in error. The NKJV is based off the Textus Receptus manuscripts same as the KJV, Geneva bible and so on. In fact, this is such widespread knowledge that I have not ever seen anyone make the claims you are in over 30 years. I would advise you to look into it just a little more. God Bless.

@@o0o_OutCast_o0o Oh. So you are saying that the preface of the NKJV does not clearly state the use of Alexandrian/Egyptian manuscripts? Maybe im reading the wrong NKJV preface. The NKJV and the KJV are two totally different bibles. The proof is in the preface as well. Have you read it?

@@o0o_OutCast_o0o If im confused, prove it. Seriously. We are told to prove all things, do the work of an evangelist, let no man deceive you. We are in the time of Amos 8, A famine, not of bread or thirst for water, but of hearing the word of the LORD. Of hearing sound doctrine. The bible clearly tells us of doctrines of devils, men who crept in unawares, teaching things which they ought not, false doctrines and damnable heresies. This is a spiritual war. Satan goes out to attack the commandments of God and to present a false testimony of Jesus Christ. It is a spiritual war. "Jesus said" the words that I speak, they are spirit and they are life. What I am telling you, is that the "spirit" has been changed. It is done so with the false bibles. God prophesied of the english bible. Zeph 3:9. He says his words would be preserved forever Psalms 12:6, and he says that man would seek to change it. I understand why you think Im confused. Im asking you to not kill the messenger. Prove what im saying is wrong. Pray about it and search the scriptures to see whether what im saying has any ground.

NIV. is not. it runs close to jehova witness teaching. Be careful. I wouldn't go pas anything except KJV... AND...NKJV..

I have read all. The KJV and NKJV are the only ones using the whole text which is why I hold to them. The others remove the equivalent of 1 and 2 Peter from the New Testament and that is why I can only consider them like storybook bibles. I discuss that further here: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-DPEfBat8txI.htmlsi=VnW48mZWMUpXOs9T

I totally agree that the KJV is more exact. I also know that some words are archaic and not as instantly understandable. If you watched to the end, you know I said there is nothing wrong with using the KJV exclusively.

@@PastorScottIngram The point that I was making is this: "What advantage does an inaccurate bible version offer anyone?" If you find one error, then how do you know how many other errors exist, in the version you are using? For instance: in the 23rd psalm, in the NIV it eliminated the words: "In the Valley of the Shadow of Death" and replaced it with "Even though I walk through the darkest valley." People reading this version would never know that there was an actual and very dangerous place in Israel named "The Valley of the Shadow of Death" for travelers who would take a shortcut between Jerusalem and Jericho. I never understand why people would choose to study a modern version over the KJV and especially when they are studying the Bible scriptures.. to learn the real truth. And especially when simply changing one word in the bible scriptures can drastically change the entire meaning. But, I did not write this to judge you or to criticize you in any way, I just want people to understand that we now have over 50 different bible versions on the market today, and that they need to be very careful which version they choose to study. One version has completely eliminated the word "virgin" when it talks about the birth of Jesus, and replaced it with the word "woman." In my opinion, this is a complete insult to all Christians. In either case, have a good day, and may God bless..

@bradleyoverton8026 well, we can say one is more exact and one is more instantly understandable because both are translations and not the main source. The main source is the original language which is of course the most exact, but far from instantly understandable to most today. Most of those modern translations have changed the source and that is where they have all erred while the KJV and NKJV have not done that. Maybe that will help clarify.

@@PastorScottIngram Still does not explain why NKJV changed iron pan (a Macedonian war god) to iron plate.. But why stop there? Why not iron skillet or iron griddle like some of the other versions? Of course, the Holy Bible was originally put together by the Catholic Church during the 3rd and 4th centuries. And the only reason why the bible exists in the Protestant Churches today, is because some people stole the bible from the Catholic Church and then printed copies in various languages. Martin Luther.. German.. John Wycliffe.. English. And there were many others. And because there were so many bibles floating around in the late 1500's. King James ordered a new and more accurate version to be created. I do not think that the New King James Version was created to make the scriptures more accurate. But then again.. I only study the KJV and I choose to reject every other version. I do not need some publisher telling me how I should interpret the scriptures. What if they are wrong in their conclusions? May God Bless and have a good day.

Do you read Tyndale’s translation exclusively?

@PastorScottIngram no, I was making a joke. In regards to different translations, I would even support 'contemporary english' translation, not for deep study, but for people with limited learning abilities. Dramatized audio versions of contemporary english are available on RU-vid. Kjv is not for people with special needs or those with literacy issues, and even for those new to studying.

I would say it is reasonable and logical but not at all blasphemous. :)

The NKJV has the doctrine of justification. In this verse it leans more toward the aspect of sanctification. The original word leaves place for either translation.

​@@PastorScottIngramNo, the original language does not. You cannot take the original Greek word in isolation. The reason the translators chose the English word they did, is because of the sum of words in the text. They (the words) point unmistakably to the translation made over 400 years ago. I'll stay with the time tested attestation of the witness of the KJV, whose credibility and character is beyond reproach. What you're doing is how error has crept in. Your witness is untrustworthy. The character of your witness is a castaway. Your witness is become unbelievable, without reference. It is as aimless sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal, and the one that clangs it, a fool. NKJV -“TEKEL; Thou art weighed in the balances, and art found wanting.”

Here I discussed the 3 biblical aspects of salvation: Justification, Sanctification, and Glorification ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-YvmRafpv_DA.html

I love you brother but I disagree wholeheartedly about the NKJV. The KJV is the inherent, infallible,preserved word of God. God said he would preserve his word. He has in English in the KJV. I'm afraid that Satan has blinded many. He's definitely tampered with ALL modern versions including the NKJV. They claim it was just made to be easier to read. Removing the thees and thous etc. Simply a lie Scott. The NKJV does not follow the only the majority text. It holds to much of the same trash manuscripts that the NIV ESV etc use. I will just hit the tip of the iceberg here, but it will be plenty to discredit the NKJV. I implore you to reconsider your endorsement of the NKJV. It's also a counterfeit. First of all,let me address the idea that young people, or novice readers can't understand the KJV. That is a pitiful argument. Anyone can look up words on their phone or computer. It's laziness. If you pray and ask for the Holy Spirit to lead you then you can easily understand the book. Plus the KJV has a built in dictionary if you continue to read. Also the context in which the word is used many times explains itself. If you rightly divided you can understand it. It's on a fifth grade reading level by the way. Now let me address just some of the problems with the NKJV. One big thing is the numerology and layout of the verses. I won't go into it but the book gets screwed up when changes are made. The KJV is amazing when you compare scripture with scripture. It proves it had God's hand on it.By the numerology and how the layout is. Clearly it does. That is complicated so I'll not go into that. But here are some mistakes and problems that will dismantle the NKJV. If you still hold to your position,then you are just not being honest with yourself, your congregation and your social media followers. The thees and thous and yous and ye were already outdated in 1611. They were put in for a reason. Like you said, for the plural and singular forms. They are very important in the passages as to help us understand what the verses mean. They are much necessary And needed. Look at these problems. Matthew 7:13,the verse about the strait and narrow gate is changed to difficult is the way in the NKJV. Meaning it's difficult to get saved. Salvation is easy not difficult. Hell has been removed 22 times. Changed to Hades. Hades coming from Greek mythology,also agreeing with other modern translations. Blood is removed 23 times.Repentance, 44 removals.God is taken out 50 times. Lord removed 66 times. Damned,damn and damnation is completely removed. The name of God, Jehovah is eliminated as well. I mean do you still think it's ok??? Hebrews 10:14 changes "are sanctified" in KJV, to BEING sanctified in NKJV. Sanctification is not an ongoing process.2 Corinthians 2:15 changes "are saved" to being saved. Being saved is also used in other verses. As if salvation is not instant it's a process. Again, lining up with other modern translations. Sodomite is eliminated and harlot is out in it's place. In other words a whore or harlot is bad but not a sodomite Titus3:10 the NKJV changes heretic to devisive person. It says to reject a devisive person. Essentially telling us to reject Christ. Luke 12 Christ says he came to give us division. Should we reject Jesus? NKJV says we should. There are over 100,000 changes from KJV to NKJV. I realize some are just punctuation and the sort but many are not. Let me just touch on the symbol Thomas Nelson stamped on the NKJV . It's a pagan symbol with three points. It's looks like the same symbol used on the TV show "Charmed" showing a trinity of witches. Just look it up. It's not the Trinity that we believe in. It's an occultic symbol. Lastly and I could go on and on, is 2nd Timothy 2:15 which to me is the key to Bible study,again they tamper with the verse. Instead of study as the KJV commands, we are told to be diligent. Study is taken out. I didn't even go into the attacks on the the deity of Christ which it does. Many places instead of using created BY him(referring to God) the NKJV says through him. Not by him through him is used. Could someone get saved reading the NKJV? The answer is yes but you can also find a steak in a Restaurant trash bin.

Greg, KJV onlyism is a sin of idolatry

@@jdc1264 😂

Right on

If you really want "truth" learn Greek and Hebrew and study the original manuscripts. Some people idolize the KJV and make it their god

If that is what you prefer. At least it uses the TR

@@PastorScottIngram But the NKJV uses the TR as well. I know! I've used one since the 80s!

Which verse are you referring to about Justification? The verse you are referring to about "saved" and "being saved," I have addressed here: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-KFY-oF9L408.html

Hello John, I hope you watched the entire video. Titus 3:10 is translating the Greek word hairetikos which is defined as “schismatic, factious, a follower of a false doctrine” therefore a divisive man and a hertick are both a correct translation. From our past discussion, I know you don’t really care what the Greek word says and believe the KJV English word has replaced it. I have other videos on your other two concerns “Saved or being saved?” ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-KFY-oF9L408.htmlsi=tZ_PGJIQbjpHsYiv “Narrow or difficult?” ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-XcBgcVWbsdg.htmlsi=cSNgLidOY43NhnPO I don’t suspect they would change your mind, as you have firm belief that the NKJV didn’t use the TR even though that isn’t true, but for anyone reading your misleading comments, they will have a quick answer to find the truth.

Among many others

Jesus was divisive per Luke 12:51 do you also think Jesus was a heretick because Jesus is divisive? Surely you understand the simple fact that one can be divisive without being a heretick and one can be a heretick without being divisive. You think Strong's is inspired it appears. Not every meaning listed for a word is correct due to the context. Due to the context the KJB is correct and the NKJV is wrong. Jesus is divisive do you think one should reject Jesus ? This shows your lack of ability to discern the truth. That is sad.

The fact remains you have NEVER specifically stated your written authority. You cannot identify with any SPECIFICITY the Greek text edition and Hebrew text edition that are your authorities. That is because you really don't have a final written authority that you can show anyone. That much is clear. You tap dance around straight forward wordings. When saved you ARE saved. You ARE saved from hell. Because of this Salvation you will be free of the presence of sin when you are no longer in the flesh and you will be given a glorified body. These are a RESULT of salvation. You either ARE saved or you are lost. There is no BEING saved as the Catholic readings say.

1 Cor 1:18, NKJV is correct. Mat 7:14 the NKJV is correct Titus 3:10 KJV simply transliterates the Greek word NKJV is more accurate.

Well, I did say the KJV was more exact while the NKJV seeks to be more instantly understandable.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts. I hope you watched until the end of the video. The main concern I have is for words that people don’t know that tney should look up the definition. Things they will think the KJV is saying when in 1611 or 1769 wasn’t the meaning of the words in question. This is something they wouldn’t know to study out because they will just read it as it is and not know to study it out. I am not saying set aside your KJV at all. I am saying the NKJV is another option for study. It is good to study both out to gather an understanding of the original words. Either way, God bless you as well!

@@Nick-wn1xw KJV only? 🤔 Someone as wise, intelligent, and discerning as yourself should know that it was called the Authorized Version of The Holy Bible for over 270 years until the scoundrels Wescott and Hort came along with their Alexandrian text and revised it. But, of course I’m sure with your scholarly intellect you knew that already. God Bless you.

Did you watch the video? You copied and pasted this same comment here and the one on "Why use the King James Version?" If you are not willing to actually watch the video, how will you know how to refute what you think I am espousing? ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-r3rZuhiLw4s.html

"All kinds of evil" is the better translation. When someone cheats on their spouse, it is not rooted in a love of money. When someone road rages, there is no financial benefit. The list is long of evil that is not rooted in a love of money. A dirty book store. Yes, that is someone wanting to bank off sin. They love money over God. So, the Pornography business is rooted in a love of money. Killing someone in a fit of jealousy is not a love of money. Killing someone for insurance money is a love of money. If I lie selling a car, my lie is rooted in the love of money. I am denying God's Word and, by that, denying the faith. I am not operating in faith. I would need to repent. The list is long of evil that is rooted in the love of money 💰 Adam & Eve's sin was not rooted in the love of money. It was rooted in pride, arrogance, and lies, and the serpent's lie was rooted in his hate for God.

Nkjv and Kjv both say the same in Genesis 47 verse 9. Both say "few and evil". I can't tell from your comment if you are against kjv or nkjv or even pro/anti niv which uses the word difficult over evil.

@@WatchingUntiltheEnd Pro Niv bible the older revision is a great bible Jacobs days were few and difficult not evil KJV is no good period .

Strong’s Hebrew Dictionary states this as the definition for what is being translated as Terenbinth as h0436. אֵלוֹן ’êlôn; prolonged from 352; an oak or other strong tree: - plain. See also 356. AV (9) - plain 9; tree, great tree, terebinthplain

So, you don’t believe in the Trinity? The Trinity is very established in the scriptures. I discuss that here: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-QfHA7YswbEI.html